Latest news with #VasylMaliuk
Yahoo
10 hours ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Ukraine Just Demonstrated What AGI War Could Look Like
Engineers test drones at drone manufacturing facility in Odessa, Ukraine on June 01, 2025. The Ukrainian forces are producing new drones and electronic warfare systems. The facility is currently testing advanced models, including self-propelled land-based drone systems. Credit - Maksim Voytenko—Anadolu/Getty Images Bombers in flames on social media. Photos of trick shipping containers packed with drones. Defiant statements from both sides about the scale of the damage. On June 1, Ukraine targeted several Russian air bases using first-person view (FPV) drones, cheap aerial vehicles which are remotely operated by pilots using camera feeds. According to reports, Ukraine used machine-learning algorithms to guide the drones to the target area. The attack, dubbed 'Spider's Web', demonstrated the current hardware capabilities of modern warfare. And as companies and governments race to develop Artificial General Intelligence (AGI)—in which advanced artificial intelligence systems can quickly understand, learn, and apply knowledge—the operation also provides a glimpse into what the future of warfare could look like. The Security Service of Ukraine's (SBU) operation knocked out targets up to 8,000 kilometers (nearly 5,000 miles) from the frontlines. As the dust settles, analysts are starting to wonder whether anywhere is truly beyond the reach of FPV drones. Some reports suggest dozens of strategic bombers (some said to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons) were destroyed or disabled by 117 FPV drones, though Moscow countered that only a handful of planes were struck. Western assessments put the figure at no lower than 10. But the scale of the attack, while impressive, isn't its most remarkable aspect. After all, the operation follows a Russian drone attack at the end of May involving almost 500 unmanned aerial vehicles. Ukraine's attack may have been smaller, but it more than made up for it in logistical brilliance. First, the parts were smuggled into the country and the drones were assembled. Vasyl Maliuk, the head of the SBU tells the BBC that they were then loaded onto lorries with secret compartments and driven by unsuspecting Russian couriers to locations near air bases. When the shipments reached their destination, roofs on the lorries retracted to reveal the hidden hardware. And the drones took off. Spider's Web depended on three distinct but related capabilities: logistics to deliver the drones, deception to keep them hidden, and coordination to pilot dozens of them concurrently. Yes, the attack confirms that expendable drones are the weapon of the 21st century. But Ukraine's strike serves as a visceral example of how AGI will work as a warfighting tool—and how humans will work alongside AGI. Make no mistake, AGI-fueled warcraft is coming. Over the past two years, the AI industry has increasingly invested in military applications of AI and gravitated towards 'security' as one of its organizing principles. Frontier labs are embedding themselves into the national security state. For instance, in June 2024 OpenAI appointed retired U.S. Army general Paul Nakasone to its Board of Directors. In December 2024, the AI-giant announced it had partnered with defense military technology outfit Anduril to develop drone defense systems. And Google, my former employer, scoped out 'national security imperatives for the AI era' earlier this year. The technology sectors' allusions to national security and AI have a certain shape-shifting quality to them. It's not always clear whether someone is referring to defensive or offensive AI capabilities, or whether it is even possible to neatly separate the former from the latter. In the context of armed conflict, things get even muddier. The idea that a sufficiently capable AGI system might eventually pilot drones is already on the minds of military planners, but Ukraine's strike on Russia gives us a much more specific picture of what to expect. Spider's Web had been in the making for eighteen months. During this time,150 small attack drones and 300 explosive devices were smuggled into Russia to stage the attack. Rather than one large shipment, the SBU likely engaged in piecemeal smuggling to avoid detection. Possibly bringing components across borders, using front companies, or bribing officials to pass through checkpoints. The fog of war is thick. We may never know for certain, but we do know that the final drones were packed into special mobile containers that looked inconspicuous from the outside. According to reports, the drivers of the lorries all told a similar story. A businessman approached them to pick up what seemed to be wooden cabins and deliver them to various locations around Russia. They agreed and thought little of it. Once the trucks were in position, the strike was launched. At the predetermined moment, each container's roof panels were remotely opened to release a swarm of drones (likely piloted remotely by piggybacking on Russian telecommunications networks). Spider's Web offers a window into how AGI could supercharge similar attacks in the future. AGI could analyse transportation routes to find the safest, fastest, and least conspicuous way to move cargo. It could plan truck routes that avoid busy checkpoints, choose transit times when border guards are understaffed, and even account for satellite overpasses or drone surveillance. Such a system could coordinate multimodal logistics (think planes, trains and automobiles) with timing that no human team could match. Not to mention it could crunch traffic patterns, rail schedules, and weather data to find the perfect moment for an attack. This hypothetical warfighting AGI could automatically generate corporate entities complete with registration documents, tax records, and websites to serve as cover. It could forge driver's licenses, passports, and employee IDs that pass automated verification—much faster than humans today could. Aside from paperwork, an AGI could manage a whole suite of deception technologies. For example, AGI could emit fake GPS signals to confuse satellite tracking or hacking into a facility's CCTV feed to loop old footage while operatives move equipment. When it's time to strike, AGI could guide each drone to its target as part of a single unified swarm, optimised to prevent collisions and spaced to maximize coverage. AGI may even make it possible to monitor the electronic warfare environment and switch frequencies if it senses jamming on the current channel. If an air defense system starts tracking the swarm, the AGI might command all drones to disperse or drop to terrain-hugging altitude to increase their odds of survival. As soon as the destination is in range, AGI could help drones autonomously recognise target types and aim for the most damaging impact points (say by guiding a drone to the exact location of an aircraft's fuel tank). To be sure, these are still predictions about what AGI may be capable of in the future. And there will likely be limitations. Precision hand-work like soldering detonators, balancing rotors, and packing warheads remains hard to automate at scale without a bespoke factory line. Robots can do it, but you still need humans to do the initial set-up. Plus, explosives sweat, lithium-ion packs puff, and cheap FPV airframes warp if left in non-climate-controlled depots. Periodic maintenance like changing desiccant packs or swapping bloated cells would likely still remain vital. A swarm of AGI-powered drones would probably still need caretakers who can move around without drawing attention. Finally, jamming-resistant links need spectrum licences, custom SIM provisioning, or pirate base-stations smuggled in-country. Deploying that communications infrastructure (like antennae or repeaters) requires boots on the ground. But even with a heavy dose of scepticism, I find it hard to see the Ukrainian strike as anything other than a postcard from the future. Problems might look insurmountable to us, but you should never bet against the machine conjuring up an unorthodox solution. I fear that the best case scenario ahead of us is one where attacks such as these can simply be delivered slightly faster. The worst case scenario is one in which a Spider's Web-style operation can be conducted orders of magnitude faster by just a handful of people. Thinking about the implications of AGI is useful in that it reminds us that power flows to whoever can orchestrate complexity faster than the adversary can comprehend it. Complexity is the strategic currency of war in the information age, and AGI is a complexity accelerator. If AGI finds its way into the wrong hands, it could become much easier to pull off a deadly attack. That is as true for the great powers as it is for rogue actors. This is the new strategic reality, and every military has to plan for it. What Ukraine's Spider's Web strike taught us is that the hardware for an AGI warfighter is ready. All that remains is the software. Contact us at letters@
Time Magazine
10 hours ago
- Politics
- Time Magazine
Ukraine Just Demonstrated What AGI War Could Look Like
Bombers in flames on social media. Photos of trick shipping containers packed with drones. Defiant statements from both sides about the scale of the damage. targeted several Russian air bases using first-person view (FPV) drones, cheap aerial vehicles which are remotely operated by pilots using camera feeds. According to reports, Ukraine used machine-learning algorithms to guide the drones to the target area. The attack, dubbed 'Spider's Web', demonstrated the current hardware capabilities of modern warfare. And as companies and governments race to develop Artificial General Intelligence (AGI)—in which advanced artificial intelligence systems can quickly understand, learn, and apply knowledge—the operation also provides a glimpse into what the future of warfare could look like. Spider's Web and the impact of FPV drones The Security Service of Ukraine's (SBU) operation knocked out targets up to 8,000 kilometers (nearly 5,000 miles) from the frontlines. As the dust settles, analysts are starting to wonder whether anywhere is truly beyond the reach of FPV drones. Some reports suggest dozens of strategic bombers (some said to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons) were destroyed or disabled by 117 FPV drones, though Moscow countered that only a handful of planes were struck. Western assessments put the figure at no lower than 10. But the scale of the attack, while impressive, isn't its most remarkable aspect. After all, the operation follows a Russian drone attack at the end of May involving almost 500 unmanned aerial vehicles. Ukraine's attack may have been smaller, but it more than made up for it in logistical brilliance. First, the parts were smuggled into the country and the drones were assembled. Vasyl Maliuk, the head of the SBU tells the BBC that they were then loaded onto lorries with secret compartments and driven by unsuspecting Russian couriers to locations near air bases. When the shipments reached their destination, roofs on the lorries retracted to reveal the hidden hardware. And the drones took off. Spider's Web depended on three distinct but related capabilities: logistics to deliver the drones, deception to keep them hidden, and coordination to pilot dozens of them concurrently. Yes, the attack confirms that expendable drones are the weapon of the 21st century. But Ukraine's strike serves as a visceral example of how AGI will work as a warfighting tool—and how humans will work alongside AGI. War powered by AGI Make no mistake, AGI-fueled warcraft is coming. Over the past two years, the AI industry has increasingly invested in military applications of AI and gravitated towards 'security' as one of its organizing principles. Frontier labs are embedding themselves into the national security state. For instance, in June 2024 OpenAI appointed retired U.S. Army general Paul Nakasone to its Board of Directors. In December 2024, the AI-giant announced it had partnered with defense military technology outfit Anduril to develop drone defense systems. And Google, my former employer, scoped out 'national security imperatives for the AI era' earlier this year. The technology sectors' allusions to national security and AI have a certain shape-shifting quality to them. It's not always clear whether someone is referring to defensive or offensive AI capabilities, or whether it is even possible to neatly separate the former from the latter. In the context of armed conflict, things get even muddier. The idea that a sufficiently capable AGI system might eventually pilot drones is already on the minds of military planners, but Ukraine's strike on Russia gives us a much more specific picture of what to expect. Spider's Web had been in the making for eighteen months. During this time,150 small attack drones and 300 explosive devices were smuggled into Russia to stage the attack. Rather than one large shipment, the SBU likely engaged in piecemeal smuggling to avoid detection. Possibly bringing components across borders, using front companies, or bribing officials to pass through checkpoints. The fog of war is thick. We may never know for certain, but we do know that the final drones were packed into special mobile containers that looked inconspicuous from the outside. According to reports, the drivers of the lorries all told a similar story. A businessman approached them to pick up what seemed to be wooden cabins and deliver them to various locations around Russia. They agreed and thought little of it. Once the trucks were in position, the strike was launched. At the predetermined moment, each container's roof panels were remotely opened to release a swarm of drones (likely piloted remotely by piggybacking on Russian telecommunications networks). The future of warfare Spider's Web offers a window into how AGI could supercharge similar attacks in the future. AGI could analyse transportation routes to find the safest, fastest, and least conspicuous way to move cargo. It could plan truck routes that avoid busy checkpoints, choose transit times when border guards are understaffed, and even account for satellite overpasses or drone surveillance. Such a system could coordinate multimodal logistics (think planes, trains and automobiles) with timing that no human team could match. Not to mention it could crunch traffic patterns, rail schedules, and weather data to find the perfect moment for an attack. This hypothetical warfighting AGI could automatically generate corporate entities complete with registration documents, tax records, and websites to serve as cover. It could forge driver's licenses, passports, and employee IDs that pass automated verification—much faster than humans today could. Aside from paperwork, an AGI could manage a whole suite of deception technologies. For example, AGI could emit fake GPS signals to confuse satellite tracking or hacking into a facility's CCTV feed to loop old footage while operatives move equipment. When it's time to strike, AGI could guide each drone to its target as part of a single unified swarm, optimised to prevent collisions and spaced to maximize coverage. AGI may even make it possible to monitor the electronic warfare environment and switch frequencies if it senses jamming on the current channel. If an air defense system starts tracking the swarm, the AGI might command all drones to disperse or drop to terrain-hugging altitude to increase their odds of survival. As soon as the destination is in range, AGI could help drones autonomously recognise target types and aim for the most damaging impact points (say by guiding a drone to the exact location of an aircraft's fuel tank). The limitations, and dangers, of AGI To be sure, these are still predictions about what AGI may be capable of in the future. And there will likely be limitations. Precision hand-work like soldering detonators, balancing rotors, and packing warheads remains hard to automate at scale without a bespoke factory line. Robots can do it, but you still need humans to do the initial set-up. Plus, explosives sweat, lithium-ion packs puff, and cheap FPV airframes warp if left in non-climate-controlled depots. Periodic maintenance like changing desiccant packs or swapping bloated cells would likely still remain vital. A swarm of AGI-powered drones would probably still need caretakers who can move around without drawing attention. Finally, jamming-resistant links need spectrum licences, custom SIM provisioning, or pirate base-stations smuggled in-country. Deploying that communications infrastructure (like antennae or repeaters) requires boots on the ground. But even with a heavy dose of scepticism, I find it hard to see the Ukrainian strike as anything other than a postcard from the future. Problems might look insurmountable to us, but you should never bet against the machine conjuring up an unorthodox solution. I fear that the best case scenario ahead of us is one where attacks such as these can simply be delivered slightly faster. The worst case scenario is one in which a Spider's Web-style operation can be conducted orders of magnitude faster by just a handful of people. Thinking about the implications of AGI is useful in that it reminds us that power flows to whoever can orchestrate complexity faster than the adversary can comprehend it. Complexity is the strategic currency of war in the information age, and AGI is a complexity accelerator. If AGI finds its way into the wrong hands, it could become much easier to pull off a deadly attack. That is as true for the great powers as it is for rogue actors. This is the new strategic reality, and every military has to plan for it. What Ukraine's Spider's Web strike taught us is that the hardware for an AGI warfighter is ready. All that remains is the software.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
The Russian aircraft Ukraine said it hit were missile carriers and other key planes that aren't easily replaced
Ukraine said it hit 41 Russian aircraft in a daring attack on multiple airfields. The aircraft Ukraine said that it hit fire missiles at Ukraine and execute other critical missions. Many of them cannot be easily replaced as Russia has stopped making them. Ukraine launched a daring attack on multiple Russian airfields on Sunday, claiming hits on 41 Russian aircraft, including certain strategic planes that aren't easily replaced. The Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) said that its operatives positioned drones close to airfields in trucks before releasing them to target Russian aircraft in "Operation Spiderweb." Videos, including drone footage obtained by Business Insider, showed burning Russian bombers. The SBU said aircraft hit included the A-50 airborne early warning and control plane, Tupolev Tu-95, Tu-22, and Tu-160 bombers, An-12 transport aircraft, and the Il-78 refueling tanker., Any A-50 loss means a loss of situational awareness for Russia's air force. These important air assets amplify the effectiveness of Russia's air force by detecting enemy aircraft, missiles, air defense systems, and ground targets. They also act as mobile command-and-control centers for directing attacks. Ukraine has shot down multiple A-50s during Russia's invasion, meaning Russia likely only has a handful left. These aircraft are estimated to cost around $300 million each. Among the other planes that Ukraine said it hit are ones Russia has used to fire missiles in its invasion. The Tu-22M is a Soviet-era bomber that its manufacturer, Tupolev, describes as a "long-range supersonic missile carrier bomber" designed to strike ground and sea targets using guided missiles and aerial bombs. The head of Ukraine's military intelligence service told BBC Ukraine last year that it carries the Kh-22 missiles, which have caused tremendous damage to Ukrainian cities like Odesa. Ukraine has previously claimed to have destroyed some Tu-22Ms, both in the air and at an airfield deep inside Russia. Ukraine estimates the planes cost around $100 million each. The Tu-95 is a Cold War-era long-range turboprop bomber that can carry eight long-range cruise missiles armed with either conventional or nuclear warheads. Russia has also used it for attacks on Ukraine. Russia also uses the Tu-160 — a heavy supersonic long-range strategic bomber first introduced during the Soviet era that is able to carry nuclear and conventional cruise missiles — in its attacks. Justin Bonk, an airpower expert at the Royal United Services Institute, told Business Insider that both the Tu-95 and the Tu-160 had been "heavily tasked" with firing Kh-101 missiles at Ukraine. The SBU said the damage inflicted by its attack could be $7 billion, a figure that has not been independently verified. The head of the agency, Lt. Gen. Vasyl Maliuk, said that the attack was meant to curb Russian attacks on Ukraine. "The adversary bombed our country almost every night from these aircraft, and today they have felt that retribution is inevitable," Maliuk said. The general said the security agency "is doing and will do everything possible to protect Ukraine." Dollar figures are tossed around for the planes Ukraine hit, but Russia can't replace some of these aircraft easily. Production of the Tu-95 and Tu-22M stopped after the USSR collapsed in 1991. Russia also no longer makes A-50s, though it said last year that production may restart. Tu-160s are still made, but slowly. Reports indicate only two have been made since 2022. Bronk said replacing the losses will be "very challenging" for Russia. "The Tu-95 has not been produced for more than 30 years and production/modernisation of the Tu-160 is at a very limited scale," he said in emailed comments to BI. Maliuk said that "34% of strategic cruise missile carriers at the main Russian airfields were hit." Imagery from the sites confirms some of the reported destruction. Satellite images from company Capella Space and seen by Reuters show what experts told the outlet appeared to be several destroyed and damaged Tu-95s and Tu-22s. Bronk said that the destruction that can be seen visually shows "this is a stunning success for Ukraine's special services." He pointed to confirmation of the destruction of around eight Tu-95 bombers, a Tu-22M3, and several other aircraft. The 41 aircraft figure given by Ukraine is being debated. Some analyses based on visual evidence that is available so far have pointed to a lower figure. Bronk said that if even half of Ukraine's claim of 41 aircraft were damaged or destroyed, "it will have a significant impact" on Russia's ability to "keep up its regular large scale cruise missile salvos against Ukrainian cities and infrastructure" while also keeping up its nuclear deterrence and signaling patrols against NATO and Japan. How the attack affects the battlefield, where Ukraine is facing a relentless push from Russia's larger military and dampening US support, remains to be seen. Dan Grazier, a security expert at the Stimson Center, told BI that he was skeptical that it was "really going to move the needle in one way or the other" on the battlefield. That said, the attack is still significant and rewrites the rules of warfare, experts say. The SBU said the attack hit four Russian airfields simultaneously across three time zones, explaining that the plan allowed it to hit the largest number of Russian aircraft at the same time. It said it brought drones in mobile containers into Russia, hiding the drones on trucks. The container roofs were opened remotely "at the right moment" and the drones struck their targets. The details of the operation have not been independently verified. It said the operation was planned for more than a year and a half. Tim Robinson, a military aviation specialist at the UK's Royal Aeronautical Society, told BI the attack will spook Western air forces. "If you're an Air Force chief and you are not lying awake at night thinking about how to protect you, you're going to lose the next war." And it's a statement of intent from Ukraine. Maliuk said "the enemy thought it could bomb Ukraine and kill Ukrainians endlessly and with impunity. This is not the case. We will respond to russian terror and destroy the enemy everywhere — at sea, in the air and on land." Read the original article on Business Insider
Business Insider
2 days ago
- Politics
- Business Insider
The Russian aircraft Ukraine said it hit were missile carriers and other key planes that aren't easily replaced
Ukraine launched a daring attack on multiple Russian airfields on Sunday, claiming hits on 41 Russian aircraft, including certain strategic planes that aren't easily replaced. The Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) said that its operatives positioned drones close to airfields in trucks before releasing them to target Russian aircraft in "Operation Spiderweb." Videos, including drone footage obtained by Business Insider, showed burning Russian bombers. The SBU said aircraft hit included the A-50 airborne early warning and control plane, Tupolev Tu-95, Tu-22, and Tu-160 bombers, An-12 transport aircraft, and the Il-78 refueling tanker., Key Russian aircraft Any A-50 loss means a loss of situational awareness for Russia's air force. These important air assets amplify the effectiveness of Russia's air force by detecting enemy aircraft, missiles, air defense systems, and ground targets. They also act as mobile command-and-control centers for directing attacks. Ukraine has shot down multiple A-50s during Russia's invasion, meaning Russia likely only has a handful left. These aircraft are estimated to cost around $300 million each. in its invasion. The Tu-22M is a Soviet-era bomber that its manufacturer, Tupolev, describes as a "long-range supersonic missile carrier bomber" designed to strike ground and sea targets using guided missiles and aerial bombs. The head of Ukraine's military intelligence service told BBC Ukraine last year that it carries the Kh-22 missiles, which have caused tremendous damage to Ukrainian cities like Odesa. Ukraine has previously claimed to have destroyed some Tu-22Ms, both in the air and at an airfield deep inside Russia. Ukraine estimates the planes cost around $100 million each. The Tu-95 is a Cold War-era long-range turboprop bomber that can carry eight long-range cruise missiles armed with either conventional or nuclear warheads. Russia has also used it for attacks on Ukraine. Russia also uses the Tu-160 — a heavy supersonic long-range strategic bomber first introduced during the Soviet era that is able to carry nuclear and conventional cruise missiles — in its attacks. Justin Bonk, an airpower expert at the Royal United Services Institute, told Business Insider that both the Tu-95 and the Tu-160 had been "heavily tasked" with firing Kh-101 missiles at Ukraine. The SBU said the damage inflicted by its attack could be $7 billion, a figure that has not been independently verified. The head of the agency, Lt. Gen. Vasyl Maliuk, said that the attack was meant to curb Russian attacks on Ukraine. "The adversary bombed our country almost every night from these aircraft, and today they have felt that retribution is inevitable," Maliuk said. The general said the security agency "is doing and will do everything possible to protect Ukraine." Hard to replace Dollar figures are tossed around for the planes Ukraine hit, but Russia can't replace some of these aircraft easily. Production of the Tu-95 and Tu-22M stopped after the USSR collapsed in 1991. Russia also no longer makes A-50s, though it said last year that production may restart. Tu-160s are still made, but slowly. Reports indicate only two have been made since 2022. Bronk said replacing the losses will be "very challenging" for Russia. "The Tu-95 has not been produced for more than 30 years and production/modernisation of the Tu-160 is at a very limited scale," he said in emailed comments to BI. Maliuk said that "34% of strategic cruise missile carriers at the main Russian airfields were hit." Imagery from the sites confirms some of the reported destruction. Satellite images from company Capella Space and seen by Reuters show what experts told the outlet appeared to be several destroyed and damaged Tu-95s and Tu-22s. A win for Ukraine Bronk said that the destruction that can be seen visually shows "this is a stunning success for Ukraine's special services." He pointed to confirmation of the destruction of around eight Tu-95 bombers, a Tu-22M3, and several other aircraft. The 41 aircraft figure given by Ukraine is being debated. Some analyses based on visual evidence that is available so far have pointed to a lower figure. Bronk said that if even half of Ukraine's claim of 41 aircraft were damaged or destroyed, "it will have a significant impact" on Russia's ability to "keep up its regular large scale cruise missile salvos against Ukrainian cities and infrastructure" while also keeping up its nuclear deterrence and signaling patrols against NATO and Japan. How the attack affects the battlefield, where Ukraine is facing a relentless push from Russia's larger military and dampening US support, remains to be seen. Dan Grazier, a security expert at the Stimson Center, told BI that he was skeptical that it was "really going to move the needle in one way or the other" on the battlefield. That said, the attack is still significant and rewrites the rules of warfare, experts say. The SBU said the attack hit four Russian airfields simultaneously across three time zones, explaining that the plan allowed it to hit the largest number of Russian aircraft at the same time. It said it brought drones in mobile containers into Russia, hiding the drones on trucks. The container roofs were opened remotely "at the right moment" and the drones struck their targets. The details of the operation have not been independently verified. It said the operation was planned for more than a year and a half. Tim Robinson, a military aviation specialist at the UK's Royal Aeronautical Society, told BI the attack will spook Western air forces. "If you're an Air Force chief and you are not lying awake at night thinking about how to protect you, you're going to lose the next war." And it's a statement of intent from Ukraine. Maliuk said "the enemy thought it could bomb Ukraine and kill Ukrainians endlessly and with impunity. This is not the case. We will respond to russian terror and destroy the enemy everywhere — at sea, in the air and on land."
Yahoo
2 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
Kremlin claims explosion did not damage Crimean Bridge – photo, video
Kremlin's press secretary Dmitry Peskov has acknowledged that an explosion occurred near the Crimean Bridge built by the Russians, but claimed that it was not damaged. Source: RIA Novosti, a Kremlin-aligned Russian news outlet Quote: "Well, there was indeed an explosion [near the Crimean Bridge – ed.], nothing was damaged, and the bridge is working." Background: Prior to this, the Security Service of Ukraine (SSU) said that on the morning of 3 June, they carried out a unique special operation and struck the Crimean Bridge for the third time, this time underwater. The operation lasted several months. At 04:44, the SSU activated underwater explosive devices placed beneath the bridge supports. The SSU reported that the explosives with a power of 1,100 kg in TNT equivalent caused significant structural damage at the seabed level. As a result of the explosion, the bridge is now in an emergency condition. The SSU noted that the operation was meticulously planned and caused no civilian casualties. The planning and coordination were personally overseen by the head of the SSU, Lieutenant General Vasyl Maliuk. Support Ukrainska Pravda on Patreon!
